Talk:Michael Clarke (cricketer)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or if there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
	This article is supported by the Sports and games work group.

Portal	Michael Clarke (cricketer) is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
B	This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian sports.
Assessment comments This article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

	Cricket Portal Click here for information about how the WikiProject assesses notability Michael Clarke (cricketer) is part of WikiProject Cricket which aims to expand and organise information better in articles related to the sport of cricket. Please participate by visiting the project page for more details.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked Categories and templates: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no <!-- 6. It is fully and correctly categorised and carries all appropriate templates. --> |B-Class-6=yes/no

whoever finishes off this page should fit in somewhere that Clarke won the Alan Border Medal, for Australia's best cricketer in 2005. Xtra 08:23, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Contents 1 plagiarism? 2 Career (cont) 3 crystal ball?? 4 no photo

[edit] plagiarism?

I've found the exact text here on this website. I'm going to edit the article to make it a bit less..like...the one there...I hope whoever popped this info there doesn't mind :) --Broomballcory 14:13, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

And that he is a cheat. Two claimed catches in a mouth. One against New Zealand keeper batsman Hopkins and the othe against Indian bastmen Ganguly. To make enhanse this you could mention that he refuse to walk when caught a first slip by Dravid in the first innings on the second test. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.150.124.59 (talk) 05:19, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Where is the reference to him being a cheat? Just because in your opinion he is a cheat doesn't make it encyclopaedic! If you are going to add text like that it must be verifiable. Until then, stop vandalising the article. Jonesy (talk) 05:31, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Career (cont)

Something like this should be included

"On December 20, 2007, Clarke claimed to first of two contriversal catches of the Austrlain Cricket season 2007/08. In the third One Day International against New Zealand in Tasmainia Clarke took the ball in the slips after New Zealand keeper batsman Gareth Hopkins edged of the bowling of Brad Hogg. Hopkins asked Clarke if he had taken the catch and after which clarke said he had. Hopkins was given out, later replays showed that the ball had bounced and Hopkins should not have been given out.

On January 6, 2008, Clarke claimed to second of two contriversal slips catches during the second test against India. Off the bowling of Brett Lee Indian batsman Sourav Ganguly edged to Clarke in the slips who claimed the catch. Ganguly suspect that the ball did not carry to clarke stood his ground. Umpire Bensen asked Clarke and Captin Ricky Ponting if the ball was caught or if it had bounced. Clarke claimed he had caught the ball and Ganguly was given out. Replays showed that the ball clearly bounce infront of Clarke and should not have been given as a catch."

There are no biases shown because it is undisputed fact that both of these incidences occured. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.150.124.59 (talk) 05:41, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

How is it undisputed fact? I am disputing it, therefore it is disputed! I don't know what replays you saw but the ones I saw were inconclusive. The fact remains, Ganguly was given out by the umpire (not Ponting or Clarke) and therefore your text should not be included in the article. Even if your uncited text was to be included, the grammar and spelling are atrocious. Jonesy (talk) 06:02, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Watch this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-xz1T9-x6eY it clearly shows the the ball has touched the ground before he has FULL control over his body and the ball. He places his ball on the ground when he is still rolling on the ground and therefore he has not got full control. Unfortuantly you are mistaken because umpire bensen could only go on pontings and clarkes word as per the aggreement made between kumble and ponting before the test series. Umpire bensen had to go on there word. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.150.124.59 (talk) 10:43, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

I guess Channel Nine should have had you in the commentary box, mate, because all three commentators agreed that it was impossible to tell from the camera angle whether the ball bounced or not. But, hey, what would they know? They're only retired international cricketers themselves.

I know the hacks in the press decided that the ball bounced, but they had their own prerogative - to cast Clarke and Ponting as the villains as thoroughly as possible in order to sell a ludicrous amount of papers. 210.1.205.85 (talk) 12:34, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] crystal ball??

Statements about someones obvious popularity with the crowd and cricket commentators/journalists are against wikipedia rules? I wasn't aware of this one. Would quotes be better? Because I am sure there are quotes out there to the effect of the statements that were deleted. Ansell 23:51, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

I recognise that it was pov to put comments relating to popularity and the future. Ironically, what I was aiming to do to the michael clarke article was not to put a pov spin on it. I started editing the article because it contained poor grammar, with the use of the word and to both conjugate multiple sentences into one and to split sentences. Sorry for the inconvenience. Ansell 00:48, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] no photo

Good article, easy to read and comprehensive... but there's no picture of Clarkie!! Hmmm. What if someone were to email Clarke's management team and ask for a promotional image of Michael Clarke to use on Wikipedia? Would he (or she) get a reply?Teebs101 08:09, 2 September 2006 (UTC)